Reynolds School District Wilkes ElementaryPortland, OR

Eco-charrette ReportJune 1, 2016

EA(Brain, BAS)

IEQ(Lungs, HVAC)

IEQ(Skin,

Envelope)

EA(Heart,

Plumbing)

WE(Kidneys,

Waste)

Systemic Sustainability

SS(Feet,

Transport)

Credits

ecoREAL, Summer Gorder, LEED/Sustainability Facilitatorsummer@ecorealsolutions.com 503.703.6213

EcoREAL, Phil Corah, Green Building AssistantPhilC@ecorealsolutions.com503.621.8102

Elin Shepard, Energy Trust Oregonelin.shepard@clearesult.com503.314.9021

Day CPM, Robert Collins, Owners Reprcollins@daycpm.com 503-641-4100BLRB, Architects

Owner’s Rep - Architectgschnaidt@daycpm.com 503-754-0282

Richard Higgins, Architectsrhiggins@blrb.com 503.535.0707

PAE, Ruwan Jayaweera, Mechanical Engineersruwan.jayaweera@pae-engineers.com503.542.0521

Hodaie Engineering, Saifan Hodaie, Electrical & Solar Ally RepEnergy & Solar Analystsaifan@hodaieengineering.com 503.808.9295

Pierre DehazeReynold’s School District - Facilities Supervisor503 550 4285PDehaze@rsd7.net

Table of Contents

1. Summary & LEEDv3 Scorecard

2. Sustainable Site Context

3. LEED Equivilant Path:Strategy Synergies

4. Group Discussion Overview

5. Team Exercise Results

6. ETO Incentive Summary

7. Path to Platium Strategy Synergy

8. Sick Building Syndrome/Triple Bottom Line

9. WELL Building Standard & GBIM

10. LEED “Post-it” Note Boards

Summ

ary & LEEDv3 Scorecard

1

The eco-charrette for the Reynolds Elementary School District kick-starts the integrated design process. In the spirit of collaboration various stake-holders from Reynolds School District, facility managers, mechanical, engineers, architects, consultants and owner representative’s team gathered together to asses systems, strategies, and goals. The diverse group provided a dynamic conversation about sustainable strategies for sites, water efficiency, energy, materials, indoor environmental quality and wellness features. Energy Trust sponsored the charrette as part of the incentive program. The charrette covered goals, ETO Energy Efficiency Measure strategies, and sustainable design synergies with interactive exercises (see end of reports). The results are documented in this report. Reynolds is not pursuing certification, but the LEED Checklist is used as a means to look at the building holistically against a nationally recognized Green Building Standard:

Reynolds Elementary School Eco Charrette

Sustainable Site Context

2Wilkes Elementery

N

Trees on the southern face can be an efficient way to block direct summer solar heat gain and glare, while allowing more winter light when leaves are gone.

While the floor plan of the Wilkes Elementary School is identical to the Fairview floor plan, The orientation of the building is rotated and flipped on the site. This opens up the building to a different series of opportunites and challenges. Having most

of the classrooms and pods facing the East side creates more moring light, producing more glare and heat in the classrooms. While the gymnasium, sitting on the Northwest side loses a lot of heat and direct sunlight. The school is also located right off of I-84, located across NE Wilkes Rd. Currently seperated by a sound wall, setting the new building back from that wall may

cause efficiency issues in the wall.

Eastern morning light also ap-plies to Western afternoon light, but not as applicable due to school hours.

East morning light can be too bright, and produce glare that can distract from kids production. Blinds or exterior vertical fins could help control direct perimeter lights.

Using View Dynamic Glass in south and southwest facing win-dows could help control direct light in the classroom, as well as controlling the heat infiltra-tion from the sun. increasing the overall comfort in the classroom.

Sustainable Site Context

The noise barrier seperating the school and the freeway, is only effective within 200 feet from the wall. The current building is located within that peramiter but the new construction is outside of the threshold.

LEED Equivalent Path: Strategy Synergies

3

Goals:• System that’s not complicated but gears for low maintenance cost• Long lasting• User friendly to staff• Get the most out of it that we can• Learner focused and safety oriented• Work with change in education and teaching curriculums• 100% free and reduced lunch and breakfast, that every student is eligible for. Compared to 40% in South Salem• Shy away from solar thermal due to lack of use during summer months.

Special notes:• Kids are traumatized by separation from school because for some it means separation from food and safety• Largest section-aid housing on Halsey and 25% of Fairview come from that housing• Multi generational • Mindful parents of safety of children after Reynolds school tragedy • Conscious of bond money.• 1.5% solar required, but alternatives will be explored.• Acoustic study due to the direct flight path of landing planes• Ambient air quality, being off of I-84 • Investigate how being set back from the sound wall can effect sound quality and air quality

ETO Special notes:• Solar Ready Program can fund conduits, structure, etc. to be ”future ready”.• Passive heating/cooling (option 1 mechanical see next page) could lead to Path To Net Zero (PTNZ) incentive opportunity.• PTNZ means 40% better than code, not necessarily Net Zero• PTNZ could provide more ETO incentives for monitoring.• 1 year retro commissioning recommended ETO pays 50% commissioning design review• *Case study- OES Beaverton Cooling gets hot in corner classroom with passive heating/ cooling system, larger testing on construction. OES is going on path to net zero (ptnz)

Group Discussion

Group Discussion O

verview

4

Group Discussion Energy Reduction Strategie overview:

• The school is orientated around existing building, north and south orientation would disrupt school therefore east and west is ideal• Open cafeteria for community use• Security doors to close off school from open public during public use• Everything 2 stories except gymnasium and kiva• 4 formal studios, centered around kiva, ideal size for 80-100 kids, each kiva equipped with different furniture and exterior learning environment• Smaller group learning room adjacent to each kiva.• Higher glazing on north and south, punched out windows on east and west• Connecting walkway to connect all four kivas• Monumental stairs on north and south hallway, open to lobby • Library on upper level above administration on NE corner of west building• Ideas of green roof near library but budget affects ability for eco roof• Overhang on first level kivas due to patios on the second floor

Team Exercise Results

5

The group had an open discussion on all the topics covered, each including their point of views on budget-acceptable ideas. Gen-eral discussions of making the building “Future Ready” when the budget allows for further expansion on LEED and WELL certficiation.

Energy Use Breakdown

• East and west side, vertical loops• Vertical openings with vertical fins- fixed *incentive to later make operable• story- likely hood of solar exposure shelter over parking lot with solar on roof Cover over basketball court• Rainwater harvesting PVs over library PV introduced to all school distracts• Solar ready to add panels in the future ETO pays 75% of solar ready program 90% solar plan• No cooling in class rooms but cooling in admin and media center• Idea of server closet. Incentives 18 sear • using transfer fan to move heat from server room to outside rooms.

Mechanical systems

Option 1

• Build envelope with good enough materials- passive heating/cooling in classrooms• Match heat loss with heat gain for maximum comfort level• Funding materials in envelope, ridding the project of piping pumps and boilers- decreases maintenance costs• $42 sq. ft. on exterior skin

Option 2

• Use heat recovery for ventilation in administration rooms, use simple systems in classrooms-no cooling • $28 sq. ft. on exterior skin

R Values/U factor

• R-40 walls• R- 50 roof• .18 sq. ft. for infiltration • .28-.3 assembly windows- double pane windows ETO pays 50% of cost of energy models for the schools

Kitchen-• Full commercial kitcheno Full prep on site for kitchen *Good incentives for kitchen appliances, no longer have fridge/freezer, primarily oven, warming, grill etc. Maybe hood cover. • Exhaust system may need further design • Exhaust fans generally only use 1 hour a day in schools.• 5000 cfm cap- over will require controls, under-no requirement. • C02 sensors required by code• Gym and commons will have their own air units. • Same with admin-separate system for heating/cooling without using whole building.• Temp controls separate from classrooms and kivas.

Water Heater System

Option 1:

• Water heater smaller 50 gal an hr per pod, larger water heater for kitchen, more equipment, smaller, easier to swap out, easier to make electric. Save a lot in piping installation and insulation• May need pump for larger kitchen water heater

Option 2:

• one single system, storing in tanks, pumping throughout building. *talk of instant hot- tankless water heater (less waste water waiting to get hot) but causes higher pwr rating. • Incentive for gas water heater not electric• Insta Hot brand, individual unit in each classroom for teacher use *Adds equipment, eliminates piping. *Case study- Reed college insta hot water placed in performing arts school, kids love access to hot water.

Lighting

• LED’s with daylighting controls- censored- manual on/ auto off Daylighting study we pay 50%• Standardize LED fixtures (T8 fixtures)• Lighting control with automation system No incentives to automated lighting systems (*Energy modeling for one project compared to all 3, however, all 3 projects are fairly similar)• use of View Dynamic Glass to decrease glare, help uncomfortable overheating classrooms and minimuze the use of HVAC systems

Interactive Team Exercises:

ETO incentive Sum

mary

6

Reynolds Summary of ETO IncentivesEco-Charrette:• $2,500 • EcoREAL is compiling required report

Solar Ready:• Solar Feasibility – 90% of fee up to $1,700 in incentives to determine the solar potential of your project.• Solar Ready Design—Up to $15,000 in incentives to build to Energy Trust solar ready standards if you can’t install solar panels

Energy Modeling:• 50% of the cost for Energy Modeling up to $50,000 ($25,000 for daylighting, CFD, etc.)• Received at the end of design phase

Commissioning:• Up to $500 in additional early design incentives• Design review with 50 percent cost share, up to $15,000• $0.15 per square foot for functional testing, up to $40,000

Modeled Savings Approach Incentives:• Up to $0.30/Kwhr saved over code• Energy Model determines savings amount (22% energy savings= $0.22/Kwhr)• Received after Construction Phase

Standard Incentives can be pursued on a case by case basis:• Examples: Boilers, kitchen equipment, task lighting not included in the Energy Model

LEED Equivalent Path: Strategy Synergies

7

PV on roof, playground or over parking

Solar exposure at long southeast facade for passive daylight and heating/cooling with structural concrete massing for “Trombe Wall” effect

Green-roof

Synergies with open space, stormwater management, heat island reduction and roof insulation. Potential trade-off with rainwater harvesting

Rainwater Harvesting

Could be harvested and reused for toilet flushing, irrigation, make-up water or janitorial uses

Geothermal / Heat pump

LEED Equivalent PathThe diagram highlights some strategies that present multiple environmental and long-term financial benefits to be further examined by the design team and Reynolds School District.

Solar thermal and/or

Sick Building Syndrome/Triple Bottom

Line

8

Sick Building Syndrome has become a major dilemma in schools. The National Education Association found in 2000 that one-third of school buildings need major repairs or total replacement due to the poor environmental conditions. While most common health problems found are not life threatening, illness such as upper respiratory illnesses, chronic headaches, stomachaches, and the exacerbation of asthma do interfere with learning and teaching.

Why It’s Important

The triple bottom line provides a value propositoin that takes environemntal, economic and social impacts into consideration for design and construction strategies. This report provides a preliminary assessment of the benefits and trade-offs of sustainable strategies through a triple bottom line lens. Social impacts are rated on a scale of basic Health, Safety and Welfare to Cultural Enrichment that not only effect the faculty and students and community mem-bers that are within the building but also how it relates to the greater communi-ty. Environmental Performance is based on lowering the impact of the building on virgin materials, potable water, energy use, which results in a lower Carbon Footprint. The economic bottom line goes beyond first costs to take into con-sideration the life-cycle cost impacts of a strategy from pre-design through operation and maintenance.

Triple Bottom Line

Triple  Bottom  Line  Assessment    Project  Name:  Multnomah  County  Health  Department  HQ  Portland,  OR    

Company  &  Community  Enrichment:  

     Environmental  Performance:  

   Life-­‐cycle  Cost  Benefits:  

       Summary:  This  report  provides  a  preliminary  assessment  of  the  benefits  and  trade-­‐offs  of  LEED  strategies  through  a  triple  bottom  line  lens  to  evaluate  the  environmental,  economic  and  social  impacts  of  each  measure.    

Basic  to  Health,  Welfare  and  Safety    

Comfort,  productivity  

Cultural  Enrichment  

Low  Impact   LEED  NC  Credit   Synergies  

$   $$     $$$  

Tips on inexpensive repairs in schools:• Select a committee of teaching staff, maintenance staff, and parents to walk through the school and identify potential environmental contaminants. • Discuss findings with the maintenance staff and develop plans and routines to correct and modify regular maintenance procedures. • Present to the school board the findings that will require additional funding outside the annual budget• Develop a preventive maintenance plan for heating, ventilating, and air conditioning systems• Discuss with maintenance staff about appropriate times to apply pesticides, floor finishes and paints that require chemical products.• Discuss with teachers about proper ventilation in classrooms (Vents are open and clear of any obstructions.) • Avoid having school buses idle in front of exterior open doors. Bus exhaust can significantly increase levels of carbon monoxide inside of buildings.

Well Building Standard & G

BIM

9

ecoREAL’s “GBIM” Tracking Tools:Green Building Integrative ManagementLEED Material and Resource Credits and IEQ Low-emitting materials will be measured throughout the project. Reynolds School districts healthy product initiative can be overlaid with the LEED credit tracking. During schematic design ecoREAL can collaborate with the team and County to assess Sustainable Material goals per the specifications. The Lean LEED tool-kit provides construction management tools to streamline the LEED verification and tracking process, and ensure correct bidding by MWESB’s. The Sustainable Material Data Sheets that go to suppliers automatically “red-flag VOC violations for low-emitting materials to ensure only healthy products are in the building, and can be used for ongoing Sustainable procurement and reporting.

*Example LEED tracking report image to be customized per team and client’s input

Healthy Material Tracking

The WELL Building Standard® is an evidence-based system for measuring, certi-fying and monitoring the performance of building features that impact health and well-being. WELL is administered by the International WELL Building Insti-tute™ (IWBI), a public benefit corporation whose mission is to improve human health and well-being through the built environment. WELL is third-party certi-fied by Green Business Certification Inc. (GBCI), which administers LEED certifi-cation and LEED professional credentialing.

WELL Building StandardThe Well Building Standard features can help manage “Sick Building Syndrome”.

LEED “Post-it” Note Boards

10

Interactive Exercise with Boards (example image)

Although LEED certification is not a requirement, LEED serves as a framework for collaboration to identify cost-effective strategies through synergies between Sustainable Sites, Water Efficiency, Energy and Atmosphere, Material and Resource and Indoor Air Quality categories.

During the Eco-charrette ecoREAL gathered and posted information onto LEED Exercise Boards pertaining to priority credits, champions and considerations from feedback during the eco-charrette.

Explanation of Interactive LEED Exercise: •Each discipline was assigned a color that correlated to the LEED Matrix •Post-it notes will be used on the board to right opportunities and/or hurdles for each strategy assigned to your discipline •Whole team will review board to determine credit goals, targets and innovations •The result is a priority list that will be utilized for desicion making.

Next Steps

1)The information from the eco-charrette is being integrated into EcoREAL Sustainability Matrix.

2) Triple Bottom Line assessment will be developed for the strategies the team and owner want to explore.

3)The Energy Model is a key component for the comparative analysis of energy efficiency measures to maximize long term return on investment and incentives.